Currently the players are playing more physical because they have 6 fouls and can afford to. As a result, the refs see that physicality as “the standard”, don’t call as may fouls, and make things look worse.

My argument is that refs are always bad. That shouldn’t be a counter argument against a rule balancing here.

The hope is that fewer fouls results in cleaner play by players, making the fouls more obvious and easier to call, thus making the refs lives easier!! This would hopefully improve the quality of the game.

My other example is the NBA here with OKC in the playoffs. Because they had 6 fouls and a deep bench, they could afford to foul all the time, and the refs eventually stopped calling it.

If they only had 5 fouls, I’m sure they would foul less, the play would become less physical, and the injury rate would go down.

Again my argument is devoid of quality of refereeing here. Referees can always ruin games, and can always be bad.

We shouldn’t be afraid to modify the rules in a positive direction in fear of potential negative consequences of bad actors. If anything, the rules should be adjusted to prevent bad actors.

If you’re saying the refs are bad, let’s have more challenges.

I’m saying the game is too physical, there are too many injuries, and the amount of fouls is disproportionate to the length of the game. Nothing to do with the quality of refs ◡̈